Re-imagining Fortune Hunter

[SamJ93]

Fortune Hunter is one of the most polarizing pricing games ever played on TPiR. Some, myself included, loved it for its unorthodox clue-based gameplay and unique multi-prize + cash structure; others hated it for its difficulty and perceived lack of excitement.

I've been racking my brain for a way to bring the game back in a way that would address the difficulty issue while also leaving the clues intact, and here's what I came up with:

-The game would now have a detective/mystery theme. Accordingly, the name of the game would need to be changed, perhaps to "Whodunit?" or "Detective Price."
-As before, the game is played for 4 prizes and a cash jackpot, this time worth as much as $10,000. The prizes would be dubbed "suspects," and the object is to find which prize is the "culprit" holding the money.
-The contestant would be given one clue for free, which would always be related to the correct prize's price relative to the other three (e.g. "the culprit is the least-expensive prize" or "the culprit is the 2nd-most expensive prize"). They can make a guess based on that alone, or instead choose to receive up to three more clues from their "confidential informant" (either played by one of the models, or just a cardboard cutout). Each clue they "buy," however, lowers the jackpot by $2500.
-The first two of the additional clues would be in the same vein as the original Fortune Hunter, such as "The culprit's price begins with 8." The third and final clue would always eliminate one of the prizes outright (e.g. "the culprit is not the pool table").
-The contestant can opt to guess which prize is the culprit after hearing any clue; if they are correct, they win all 4 prizes and the amount of the jackpot to that point. (Of course, the contestant would have to make a guess after the third and final clue.) If they're wrong, however, the game ends.

Thoughts?

[EvilChameleon]

My only issue is the game immediately ending after the first wrong guess, because then there's not much incentive to go for $10K. I would say if you guess wrong with $10K on the line, then you get the second clue and it drops to $7500, and then if you guess wrong there, game over.

[brosa0]

I'd like to see it return as a simpler, 3-prize 'quick' alternative to Most Expensive/One Wrong Price so those games don't have to be played so often.

1. Offer 3 prizes + $5000; however, the prizes could be smaller if needed ($500-2000) and closer in price to each other than ME/OWP to aid the gameplay and offset the cash prize.

2. The host gives the contestant two clues upfront to help them identify the correct prize.  The clues would be similar to the original Fortune Hunter, e.g. "Not the most expensive prize / Not $xxx / Does not start with a X", and would be displayed as part of the game's set, not just read out by the host.   

Clues would need to be set in the negative so that the contestant has to use both clues to identify the prize (for example, if one of the clues was "The most expensive" then the game literally becomes Most Expensive regardless of the other clue, whereas  "Not the most expensive" means it could be either or the two lower-priced prizes).

3. The contestant then selects the correct prize that the $5000 is attached to based on those two clues - this way it's a quick, one decision game like ME/OWP instead of eliminating one prize at a time.   This would also avoid the awkwardness of the original Fortune Hunter where the contestant might eliminate the wrong prizes along the way, yet still stumble into a win.   A smaller cash prize of $3000 could be considered given the game would be easier to win.

[gamesurf]

I liked the idea of Fortune Hunter. The problem was one of execution.

Every playing turned into trying to find some creative way to rewrite "eliminate the least expensive", "eliminate the most expensive", and "eliminate the prize that starts with X/is X". It became repetitive, and the price reveal at the end left very little time to show what the contestant "should" have done.

Maybe it would have been easier to follow if as each box was eliminated, rather than taking the box off the podium, the model opened the hopefully empty box and revealed the price a la Danger Price, with tension building as the contestant got down to the final two. But then if the game ends early you lose the best part of the game--the contestant opening the box to "1-2-3-NOW".

I'm glad it became Half Off instead.